Posted
by
Soulskill
on Wednesday May 18, 2011 @06:25AM
from the terms-of-disservice dept.

Max Hyre writes "The Nintendo 3DS's terms of so-called service, and the even more grotesquely-misnamed privacy policy, make it clear that you are in the service of Nintendo. Specifically, anything you do, write, photograph, or otherwise generate with the 3DS is Nintendo's possession, for them to use however, whenever, and for as long as they want. On the other hand, if you do something they don't like, they're prepared to turn your device into a doorstop — and you gave them permission when you started using it. And if you have a child's best interests at heart, don't give it to anyone too young to know to never use her real name, type in an address or phone number, or take any personally-identifiable photos. They might, at best, end up in a Nintendo ad."

Well, if Sony hadn't so royally screwed up it's security on the PS3 and the PSN, Nintendo wouldn't have felt the need to lock down their newest system this hard! They learned that the only way to stop people from hacking their consoles is to cause the consoles TO CATCH FIRE AND EXPLODE if you do something wrong. But they realized that might end badly, so they went with the next best option and just decided to brick the things. Sony, on the other hand, is trying to perfect localized disintegration technology

Nah, that's Dell laptop batteries. Nintendo would prefer to make you mentally ill by causing you to have dreams about nauseatingly cute characters making stupid noises, bouncing around platforms, talking in speech bubbles and overusing the word "destiny".

Actually, I think they just do that anyway whether you've annoyed them or not. Anyway, screw this, I'm off to buy a copy of "moron power 3: batshit edition" with the free keyring.

There's this strange perception around some parts (particularly around here) that Nintendo are somehow "more ethical" or "consumer-friendly" than the other console manufacturers. This overlooks the fact that Nintendo are the people who normalised console region locking (and who are still trying to push and extend it even now, when Sony and MS have decided they're not interested any more), cracked down on homebrew whenever they can and put out consoles which don't even give so much as a tiny whiff of an "OtherOS" or "PS2 Linux kit" walled garden. In fact, going off their track record, they'll even try to sue you if you have a job they don't approve of and make a post on your blog saying you like one of their games (though I seem to remember they did apologise to the young lady in that particular case after it sparked an outcry).

Ok, they've probably got a way to go until they beat the Sony CD-rootkit fiasco (which didn't actually stem from Sony's gaming division anyway). But in pretty much every other respect, it's hard to say that they're any better than Sony - and I'd personally say that they're more anti-consumer than MS's gaming division (who don't seem particularly evil these days, even if they do occasionally do "inept" or "stupid" over something like Games for Windows Live).

I suspect Nintendo get a free pass from many due to a combination of nostalgia and the fact that they were the industry's underdog for two console cycles. One could perhaps draw parallels with Apple, if one really, really wanted to burn karma. It's not always correct to assume that the underdogs are any more ethical than the.. erm... overdogs. Reflexively and uncritically back the underdogs in every case and you may find yourself in a very uncomfortable position when they actually break through (feel free to insert Egypt/Libya comments here as appropriate to your own political persuasion).

On the region lock thing, they actually made the 3DS region locked. That console is officially useless unless you live in the US or Japan.Good for the FSF, Nintendo needs a reprimand in form of low sales or high piracy rates, they need to be returned to reality. With a bang.

Hey, I was more of a PC gamer and Sega person myself (though I confess that there were some SNES games that turned me green with envy, like Super Mario World).

And it's not as if Sega went on to do anything evil. Well, not unless you want to count pretty much every Sonic game published between Sonic 3 and Sonic Colours (excluding those two titles). I've seen... pictures... of cutscenes... that I would pay a lot of money to be able to forget. Actually, yes, that counts as some of the vilest evil in the histor

The 3DS is region locked. First handheld ever to be so. Every Nintendo home console since the year dot has been region locked. Sony ditched region locking for games on the PSP and PS3. The 360 has region locking, but while it used to be mandatory for certification, MS leave it up to the publishers these days and most of them don't use it. Earlier handhelds such as the Gameboy, GBA and DS were probably not region locked because it was simply too much hassle to put the extra gumpf needed for it into the handhelds at the time while keeping size etc down. And not only does Nintendo region lock, but they also have a paternalist, authoritarian approach to which games can come out in which regions - witness The Last Story getting locked as Japanese-only, despite the success of previous Mistwalker games in the west.

I have no particular brief for MS. I own 360, a PS3 and a Wii (as well as a PSP, a 3DS and a high-end gaming PC). I like my 360 - and I like my PS3. Admittedly, Sony are in my bad books at the moment because I've just had to change my credit card thanks to them (which does tend to grate a bit). I don't tend to beat-up on them in the long term, though, because there are always plenty of others to do that. While at the same time, Nintendo do a lot of other things that are really, really bad (and if you are in Europe, then region locking is really, really bad) and generally seem to get away unscathed - indeed, with a little halo.

I've also got no idea why on earth you think that I just want games full of space marines. A quick glance at my posting history will show that games I've written nice things about lately include Valkyria Chronicles and Ar Tonelico Qoga, both of which have a distinctly non-space-marine aesthetic. In fact, Halo bores me rigid (though I do have a soft spot for Gears of War, largely because it's just so ridiculously over the top).

The absence of a browser in the 360 is an oddity, I'll admit. I've never really understood why they never put one in, given that the Wii and PS3 both have them (though the Wii's is borderline unusable and the PS3's is only marginally better). But to be honest, a browser is pretty low on the list of things that most people want from their consoles. Decent online multiplayer functionality tends to rank a bit higher on the list - and has yet to appear on any Nintendo console.

Nintendo has had more region free gaming across the board than any other company they've competed again. Their portable systems never had any region locking which has allowed me and others to buy Gameboy and DS games from across the world. They did introduce region locking on the DSi download games but that is certainly no worse than MS or Sony.

PSP games weren't region locked and neither are virtually any PS3 games. IIRC one region locked title was a special edition of Stranglehold which had a copy of Hard Boiled the movie on it which had distribution issues. I'd add that you can purchase content from any region on PSN as well.

So it isn't the case they're better than Sony is, they're distinctly worse. Not to say Sony won't do the same thing in time with the NGP of course but I expect they'd create more problems than they'd solve by doing it.

The general direction of travel with Sony is away from region locking. The PS1 and PS2 were fully locked, the PSP and PS3 are not locked for games (besides that one example you name, which I believe was accidental). Sony's preferred HD video physical medium (Blu-Ray) supports region locking and some studios use it, but the proportion of region-free BDs out there is far higher than the proportion of region-free DVDs ever was. I would be very surprised (and cross) if NGP games were region locked.

How can the general direction of Sony be region locking when the current generation is considerably more liberal than the ones that preceded it?

As for Blu Ray region locking, that is a function of the studios & distributors demanding it. Movie rights are hideously complex and some distributors use locking to stop movies from leaking outside the region they have rights to distribute into. This seems more prevalent on European / Art house movies than mainstream productions. Where issues don't exist, the

Nintendo does well because their business model is sensible. They make money on their hardware.

So that's interesting because if they make money on their hardware, why do they care what I do with it after I buy it? Why don't they market it as a gaming/development platform? Why don't they just release all their tool chains for everyone to use to develop on their systems if they already make money on the hardware? I mean, you'd probably sell more platforms that way, right? Why do I need to pay some absurd amount of money for a developer's license and a kit to play with them? Perhaps because their business model also relies on a walled garden and though they may make money on the console, the real money comes from sales of games for that console. I think if you had the numbers, you'd see that their profit model is not a whole lot different than Sony or MS. Everyone plays that game.

They also offer things that everyone wants. MS fanboys need to realise that not everyone wants to play as a big fat space marine or some other "extreme" character doing the same damn thing in every sequel while spurting out god awful dialog that sounds like it was written by the 13 year olds play the game.

Having just played through Beautiful Katamari and Rapala Bass Pro Fishing on my 360 last night, I have to question this statement (not that fishing games don't exist for the Wii). I think your statement works well generically. Observe: (MS|Nintendo|Sony) fanboys need to realise that not everyone wants to play as a (big fat space marine|big fat Italian plumber) or some other ("extreme"|"cute") character doing the same damn thing in every sequel while spurting out (god awful dialog|It's a me, a Mario|PikaPikachu) that sounds like it was written by the (13 year olds|racists) play the game.

So I'm not seeing how you feel Nintendo is worse than the competition. Your comment is uneducated fanboy verbal masturbation at best and not surprisingly all the other little uneducated xbots gave you a +5 interesting for spouting crap.

I think the key here is that the three big names have their ups and downs. Why on earth do you act like there are no "downs" with Nintendo? If price is important to you, go with Nintendo. The Wii was the first of the three I bought. If graphics are important to you, go with the PS3. If online FPS is important to you, go with the XBox 360. If offline multiplayer is important to you, go with the Wii. Etc, etc. I own all three. And I play all three. Your post ironically makes you look like the fan boy and RogueyWon look like a well tempered gamer. Some of your acclamations for Nintendo are more than questionable...

Other than lawsuits against companies like Lik Sang and the companies making R4-style cards? What about system updates specifically to uninstall The Homebrew Channel on Wii? And given the phrasing in Nintendo's developer qualifications [warioworld.com], I don't see Nintendo making anything like Microsoft's App Hub or the iPhone developer program any time soon.

In fact the guy doing the no$gb emulator has even been selling his tools for gameboy development to anyone and Nintendo hasn't bothered him. He now even supports the DS.

Nintendo, Sony, etc. are all companies... and they make money... end of story

A company can make money by acting in their customers' interests. Using the fact that companies exist to make money as an excuse for their behaviour is a cop out. If customers reward companies that treat them well, and avoid companies that don't, then companies that behave badly will make less money. This will only happen if customers are made aware of how companies behave, and that's the aim of this campaign.

Yes, I think that's right. Nintendo spent 2 generations as the "also rans" and even in the Wii generation have failed to turn their huge installed base into the kind of cultural dominance that Sony saw with the PS2 (because they targetting the wrong market segments). When your market position is poor, it doesn't really matter how control-freaky you are - to most consumers, it doesn't matter as you have no influence. Apple benefitted from this for years, then suddenly the ipod, iphone and ipad got big and pe

I'm actually one of the apparently few people who really likes 3D tech of all kinds, and could have possibly bought it just for that (I don't really play games much anymore). Still I figured it could be fun to play with.

But this crap sucks all the enjoyment out of it. If I'm not going to have control over what I buy, then I'm not going to buy it at all.

I'm actually one of the apparently few people who really likes 3D tech of all kinds, and could have possibly bought it just for that (I don't really play games much anymore). Still I figured it could be fun to play with.

But this crap sucks all the enjoyment out of it. If I'm not going to have control over what I buy, then I'm not going to buy it at all.

I take it that you only use Free Software then? According to the EULA You don't own Windows, the XBox, the Playstation, any of their respective games, and add to the list nearly all proprietary software. Next time, before you click "accept", scroll through and see exactly what rights you're giving up. (At work, I recently clicked "accept" and agreed to waive my company's rights to a jury trial, and allow the software developer to choose the arbitrator.)

I take it that you only use Free Software then? According to the EULA You don't own Windows, the XBox, the Playstation, any of their respective games, and add to the list nearly all proprietary software. Next time, before you click "accept", scroll through and see exactly what rights you're giving up. (At work, I recently clicked "accept" and agreed to waive my company's rights to a jury trial, and allow the software developer to choose the arbitrator.)

FOIA requests concern data held by the government - not data held privately (such as the Nintendo 3DS parked under your television). The FOIA is only useful if the government already has your data. Besides, privacy exclusions limit the information that can be disclosed. An FOIA request doesn't grant ownership of the requested data. It's not as if the USPS can request a copy of the song you wrote last week on your 3DS in order to sell it to MCA.

The FSF is specifically concerned about users giving their own identifying information to Nintendo through a 3DS. However the government already knows who you are, where you live, who you've worked for, when you were born, etc. Plenty of companies have already shown how easy it is to get that information from the government and do whatever you want with it.

If, on the other hand, you are creating new data on an internet-connected gaming device, I would suggest you might want to look at new platforms fo

You have one (faint) advantage with the (U.S.) federal government: they are still somewhat restrained by the Constitution. Nintendo, courtesy of the spineless Congress, has roughly no limitations on what they can do with the info.

Sure, but the point I'm after is that the information on the consumer that the FSF is so interested in raising a stink over, Nintendo could just as well get from the federal (or local) government anyays.

It is not specific to Nintendo, Sony, or whatever company. The problem is that they can put whatever in the "terms" (which are only shown after the sale) and that for some incomprehensible reason some "law" systems abide extreme corporate fantasies instead of protect from them.

The extra problem, with modern electronic devices, is that the absurd terms can often be enforced automatically, which makes them hard for anybody without significant technical knowledge to avoid, and hard for anybody without significant legal backing to seek redress for after the fact.

The practice of printing crazy shit vaguely grounded in a wet dream of copyright law on packaging goes back at least as far as Edison cylinders. However, an Edison cylinder wasn't going to phone home to the mothership and automatically enforce the terms whenever it got within range of an internet connection. If you did something in breach of the shrinkwrap EULA, the burden was on them to find out and sue you. Now, many of the terms can be enforced automatically, and it is on you to demonstrate that you were wronged in some legally actionable way and that the clickwrap is unenforceable.

In this case, Nintendo appears to be claiming the right to hoover up, and use for any purpose, basically anything stored on the hardware, and to brick the hardware if they don't like its state. Both of these activities would be quite easy to do automatically. It may not be entirely true that "possession is nine tenths the law"; but starting from the position where the opposing party has already done unto you, and you have to fight to keep them from getting away with it is not a pleasant business...

There's little data you can create on a 3DS using built-in software and purchasable games. It's mostly just pictures and StreetPass data. StreetPass data is already broadcast promiscuously to every other 3DS you come near, so it's hardly going to be considered 'private information' by the owner (or shouldn't, if they have any sense).

Nintendo collecting this information and using it for anything public and that anyone might object to would be foolhardy, as they'd have to navigate privacy laws. Even aside from COPPA etc., minors are legally unable to sign contracts, and that includes clickwrap EULAs. Nintendo would have to obtain written consent from the (potentially minor) players in order to use their pictures or other personal information. Aggregated game statistics are something that noone is likely to object to being publicly disseminated, even if the legal basis for its collection is murky/invalid.

There is a built-in web browser but I'm skeptical that anyone would do serious web content creation from a 3DS and care that Nintendo could theoretically lay claim to it.

There's little data you can create on a 3DS using built-in software and purchasable games.

Ever seen Korg DS-10?

(Personally, I don't believe Nintendo is gonna take people's photos and use 'em in ads or whatever. The clause is probably more to cover their ass, if they happen to feature something in an ad that someone claims they themselves created. Nintendo can point to the clause and say "suck it, bitch!" But regardless of intent I think terms like that are unreasonable...)

Would they need to do that? In the US at least, if I take a picture of a random person on the street, the picture is mine. I can sell it to whomever I want without getting the subject's consent. If I don't get their consent and the picture ends up in an ad campaign, I'm sure they could sue for some money, but Nintendo has the lawyers to fight those battles.

And that's assuming the subject isn't underaged. I'm pretty sure in that case you would need the parent's permission.

Virtually all services and products produced which are useful or fun in some way have got dodgy ToS' or EULAs or other disclaimers that screw the user's rights. At this rate if I boycott each and every company who's been or is currently being a dick towards the consumer, there'll be nothing left.

Not that it's a bad thing for the FSF to make such hostile agreements public of course. But having said that, I doubt the FSF would support buying any modern console given they are all from dodgy companies and/or have dodgy terms/EULAs. So what's left? Certainly not the PC - the prime platform is Steam these days, and I find it hard to believe the FSF could support something like Steam for a multitude of reasons.

Might as well just not play any games... except for the FLOSS stuff. If that's the case, I'd get a new hobby. The FSF sure makes life fun. Maybe the solution is to realize things are fucked, and just go with it. Better to not be ignorant of the state of the world, and at least get some enjoyment out of it. It's the only reason why I can stand using Steam - don't want to sound like a bitter old bastard later on in life while every else is enjoying themselves.:)

Maybe the solution is to realize things are fucked, and just go with it.

No. the real solution is to change the fact that these stupid things are lawful. FSF has a nice example, but the wrong target. They should target the law and politics for making these absurd situations possible. The law should protect you from these situations, not encourage them. Nintendo is only guilty of using the possibilities they were given. Target the people responsible for giving Nintendo these possibilities.

Target the people responsible for giving Nintendo these possibilities.

Ideally, if everybody voted with their wallets against companies that use these possibilities, there wouldn't be a market for products that incorporate these possibilities. Then these possibilities would become impossibilities because companies would avoid them for fear of having no customers.

I did not buy a DSi. And without substantial changes in policy, I will not buy a 3DS or whatever Nintendo will call its successor to the Wii.

Unlike some other console makers, who have been seen to introduce new hardware at a break-even price, Nintendo makes money on the hardware from day one. This means Nintendo makes more money when a customer buys three Nintendo 3DS units, one for each region.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htTs9CC52cA [youtube.com]
She brings up some pretty interesting points. I was thinking about getting one as well but I'm definitely not anymore, not after this. I've also seen a few sites defending Nintendo because it "protects against piracy". When I asked the girl who covered this on her youtube channel she said she thinks it's not about piracy at all, but that Nintendo is using Piracy as an excuse to radically control its users and profit off of them. Interesting points, even if a bit "

Wait for the Hacked Cart's to come out that will bypass all this crap.

Honestly, I dont see all the fuss, I played a 3ds for about 2 hours, the effect is not that impressive and I started to get a headache after a while. I can see 8 year olds whos parents are too busy with their career wanting it, but I cant see anyone else really interested in it.

Honestly it looks like Nintendo reign as king of videogames is at an end. The last 3 iterations of the DS have been meh, and the WiiWii will not gather any atten

If you purchase a device second hand then you have not agreed to anything. Does their terms of service deny you the right to sell the device? Does their terms of service require you to inform the purchaser of any agreements?And if those are not the case, an they take your data and use it, then THEY have broken the law. Right?

Or if you buy it in a country with good laws eg. Denmark. Here companies can't force anything if the customer wasn't presented with the terms before buying the products. Terms included inside a box isn't legal including M$ EULA.

Ironically, just yesterday I just gave my 10 yr old son a 3DS for his birthday, he's been wanting one for months.
As I was helping him set it up, I came across the Terms button, and almost clicked it to check; but then I realized that the reality was, there was no way I was going to tell this excited happy child, after his drooling for this thing the past 3 months, that his main birthday present, already in his hands, was suddenly going back to the store, -tough luck kid. I figured there'd be some of th

"By accepting this Agreement or using a Nintendo 3DS System or the Nintendo 3DS Service, you also grant to Nintendo a worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display your User Content in whole or in part and to incorporate your User Content in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed, including for promotional or marketing purposes. (Chapter 1, Nintendo 3DS End User License Agreement)"

Not legal in many jurisdictions, and not enforceable. Check into your local laws, but most countries are sane about that kind of thing: specifically you cannot preemptively sign away your copyright on things you haven't even created yet.

That said, I wouldn't buy the handheld anyway. My cell phone is good enough for casual gaming on the bus, and I have better things to do with my time than sit around playing video games... if I'm not at home, I'm either travelling or doing something. If I am at home, and the mood to play a video game strikes me, I have much better systems available to me than a handheld.

I, for example, work for "insert massive international technology conglomerate" and they own the rights to ALL work I do during the time oft he contract including work I _MAY_ do in the future. That was the terms of my employment contract - and they can in fact do _anything_ they see fit with _anything_ I do during the instigation and termination of the agreement (it is a matter of debate whether this includes work I do during company hours or my own projects at home.

So, I'm fairly certain they can write that into a contract and make it enforceable... The problem is that this is a "license" not a contract which brings up the thorny issue of enforcement.

You would be on good, or at least interesting, legal grounds by saying that you did not agree to the terms provided. The "contract" provided by Nintendo, at least in UK terms, could be seen as abusive as it can not be terminated (unlike my employment contract). I find it unlikely that the clause "or using a Nintendo 3DS System" would be valid in that it means that you are bound by action (not contract) to an agreement not provided with the device you are using - that is to say you would have no idea that you had agreed to the license or even know what the license terms are just by playing Metroid... kinda stupid. Well, those are just random thoughts - I'm not sure anything like this has actually shown up in court so the number of possible ways to defend yourself and the the "provider" to defend themselves is currently a bit of an unknown.

At least the agreement is non-exclusive!

I have no idea why Nintendo have produced such a draconian license for, what is essentially, a toy.

I'm not an lawyer but I have to work with dozens and dozens of damn software licenses and contracts every day - it's tiresome.

I'm inclined to speculate that there might, just might, be a difference between the terms of a contract of employment, and a license provided with a hardware/software combination. I'm not even sure that the catch-all clauses in employment contracts are enforceable for inventions or creations that don't directly relate to the business of the employer, but I'm too lazy/busy to look up case law on that one.

That contract is not legal in some jurisdictions, including the US state I live in. That doesn't stop companies from writing it into a contract, though, but it does mean it's unenforceable in various places.

The problem is that this is a "license" not a contract which brings up the thorny issue of enforcement.

That's not a problem for Nintendo - since all the files are being sent automagically to Nintendo, the enforcement is built in to the device - it would be up to you to contest the deal.

You would be on good, or at least interesting, legal grounds by saying that you did not agree to the terms provided. The "contract" provided by Nintendo, at least in UK terms, could be seen as abusive as it can not be terminated (unlike my employment contract)

Ob.answer: Since this is a license for the use of the software, you can simply choose not to use the software. Thus, it can be terminated.

I have no idea why Nintendo have produced such a draconian license for, what is essentially, a toy.

That's easy - as written, it's free content for them. They don't even have to curate - I'm sure some stock photo sites will pay for the entire collectio

Not legal in many jurisdictions, and not enforceable. Check into your local laws, but most countries are sane about that kind of thing: specifically you cannot preemptively sign away your copyright on things you haven't even created yet.

Legal or not, enforceable or not, this is hostile behavior on the part of Nintendo.

It really is time that companies pay a price for being hostile to their customers, don't you think?

And history has shown that legal or not, when a powerful corporation's legal department wants to go after someone who doesn't have endless resources, there is a de facto enforcement.

Not legal in many jurisdictions, and not enforceable. Check into your local laws, but most countries are sane about that kind of thing: specifically you cannot preemptively sign away your copyright on things you haven't even created yet.

Legal or not, enforceable or not, Nintendo can afford more lawyers than you.

That said, I wouldn't buy the handheld anyway. My cell phone is good enough for casual gaming on the bus, and I have better things to do with my time than sit around playing video games... if I'm not at home, I'm either travelling or doing something.

So you have no interest in a portable gaming console, and won't be buying one?
Thanks for sharing.

In other news I probably won't be buying a new coffee machine this week even though the one at home is beginning to dribble coffee grounds when you first turn it on so I'll probably wait until my next payday unless of course I go crazy and blow it all on a fancy new washing machine but then the kids might have to go without new trainers this month...

The quoted does not require you to give up your copyright, I believe it can only be done as work for hire. The copyright stays with you, but Nintendo gets a license to use your work in a manner describe. Same thing happens when a writer signs a contract with a publishing house - they keep their copyright, that must be displayed on a published work in the usual places and grant the Publisher a right to print, distribute, sell, sub-license.

What exactly is the Nintendo 3DS Service, and where does the Terms of Service define "User Content"? That paragraph looks like standard boilerplate for things like web forums, where it's the only way that the forum can legally display stuff that you post to other people.

I know that we're reached a point in humanity where culture, politics and lifestyle have globalised and we're accelerating toward a totalitarian's wildest dreams on groupthink... but I don't think we're at the point that the FSF should be called "extreme fundamentalists".

Examples of extreme fundamentalism:- Obey this book or you go to Hell - since you're ignoring the book, let me help you there!- Science provides the answer to every question - including the unfalsiable ones!- An eye for an eye - so let me burn out your eyes!- All property is good - I kill you if you're starving and you take some of my food store!- All property is bad - I want your hammer to smash stuff up!etc.

Examples of positions probably founded in some ideal which are not extreme fundamentalism, and which may apply to the FSF:- Don't grant anyone the right to do anything its wants with any information it can obtain off you.- Don't grant anyone the privilege to destroy your stuff at will.- Expose people who try to do either of the above in order to spread awareness and modify behaviour.- Oh, while you're here - if it doesn't harm you, how about sharing instead of hoarding?

but I don't think we're at the point that the FSF should be called "extreme fundamentalists".

"Extreme fundamentalist" is certainly the wrong word to use, but on the other side the tone that the FSF uses comes across as kind of lunatic and thus regularly misses exactly the people they want to target. The point that the FSF makes here is a very real one, but its hard to look at that page and not just quickly dismiss it as just some crazy people doing their little thing, especially for people who might have never heard of the FSF before (aka most 3DS buyers).

Well, the FSF are neither hip nor slick, and I guess politics is at the point where no-one really engages in straight-talking rhetoric - so those who try to "say it like it is" in the style of mainstream politicians even three decades ago are now dismissed as "kind of lunatic". I'm not sure how to solve this problem, but I don't know that being as bad as the rest of them is the solution either.

But certainly a campaign like this needs to illustrate viable alternatives. The FSF has, of course, had a big hand in the "make viable alternative" goal, butin this particular case it does seem to be telling you what's bad rather than what's better.

Well, the FSF are neither hip nor slick, and I guess politics is at the point where no-one really engages in straight-talking rhetoric - so those who try to "say it like it is" in the style of mainstream politicians even three decades ago are now dismissed as "kind of lunatic". I'm not sure how to solve this problem, but I don't know that being as bad as the rest of them is the solution either.

But certainly a campaign like this needs to illustrate viable alternatives. The FSF has, of course, had a big hand in the "make viable alternative" goal, but
in this particular case it does seem to be telling you what's bad rather than what's better.

The problem I see with the FSF is that it makes big bones about the legalities, but doesn't really bring home what that means

Telling folks that Nintendo get a non-exclusive license to their User Content and can modify the firmware is going to get yawns (or worse, jeers because they're sounding so shrill about it).

Instead, put it in real world terms - are you buying Timmy a 3DS? Nintendo wants to be able to sell all the information he puts into that device. They want to be able to sell the pictures of your

but on the other side the tone that the FSF uses comes across as kind of lunatic and thus regularly misses exactly the people they want to target.

Maybe the FSF is just ahead of its time. I think people's perspective regarding the behavior of these large corporations regarding intellectual property is starting to catch up.

Why is there still no hardware database of the good stuff that doesn't limit my rights?

Think about it. The answer may be embedded in the question.

It has become industry standard to attack privacy and personal ownership. Which is a good reason that FSFs tone is often negative. Maybe it's time to exert the power of the consumer to change the direction in which corporate hegemony is going.

Maybe it's time to exert the power of the consumer to change the direction in which corporate hegemony is going.

Yes, but thats exactly my point. If you want to get the consumers to listen, you need to inform them, not confuse them with weird campaigns and "all hardware is evil" messages that will just make them turn away. People that are buying 3DSs are not giving them up just because the FSF says so, they might not even care if it has DRM at all, they might however listen to invasion of privacy and other issues. Make that the center of the campaign, get them interesting and tell them a bit about the problems of DRM

> Another thing that bothers me is that the FSF stuff almost comes across as negative, so 3DS is evil, iPad is evil, Kindle is evil, etc. Great, but what hardware is actually ok to buy? Why is there still no hardware database of the good stuff that doesn't limit my rights?

In general, I agree with FSF philosophy (the biggest difference being I don't think proprietary software is inherently evil) and admire their vision. I find their choice of targets frequently incomprehensible, and their PR tactics often juvenile and ineffective. That's why I contribute to EFF and not the FSF or their campaigns: I think my money is more usefully spent with the EFF.

I'm not sure what flavor of "balance" could make the language of Nintendo's ToS any less absurdly draconian.

Is a lot of it probably unenforceable? Yeah, possibly, if you've got a hundred grand and a year to drop on fighting it; but that will hardly be relevant to most users of the device, especially if its terms are(on devices not modified with sufficient cleverness) enforced technologically.

It's not flamebait. The FSF has tried time and again to start PR campaigns with laughable results eg "windows 7 sins". They have legitimate points which I am inclined to agree with but they haven't found a way to appeal to the average user. What average user even gets the brick reference? C'mon now. Hire a PR person from the real world, and give him the ability to say no to Stallman when things won't translate, and the FSF could do a lot more good in the world.

It's sad but it does seem to be the case. Maybe they have become disillusioned after years of trying to raise awareness and finding that the common folk just didn't care. If they speak about the importance of free software principles, their words will fall on deaf ears. But if they aggressively raise these red herring issues that the average person can relate to, they will get some much wanted attention. It's hard to tell whether they will win any permanent mind share this way.

I have to agree. Where's my Gnu Call software to replace Skype now that there's a massive impetus to move away from MS-owned Skype? We already have all the components in place and it's a "high priority" thing for the FSF apparently but yet - nothing. SIPWitch has been around since 2008 in 0.0000000.0.000.001 releases and there's no sight of how it will replace a Windows binary, how it will become as ubiquitous as they want it to, how well it actually works when scaled up, there's no push to use it or tes

Something simple for users to install and run, no need to mess with firewall rules etc...

Perhaps a cross between jabber/xmpp and sip...Online communication is performed like email, where anyone can run their own server for a given domain and users have a choice of providers they can sign up to.Bridging to regular phones on the other hand, you can select from any one of many SIP providers to route inbound and outbound calls for you... Choose

Easier said than done, as is the case with a lot of these things. It's easy enough to figure out what the basic requirements are, however, writing all that code is a whole other thing. There's aren't a lot of people out there with the capabilities to write really good software. And the ones who do have the capabilities usually have quite a bit of work on their hands already. Unless you can find a corporate/philanthropist sponsor to dedicate expertise and money to your project, it will be really hard to

The FSF does advocacy, not code. I contribute to a project that had a request for contributors on the front page of the FSF site for about a year (which netted us a total of 0 patches). The FSF will happily say that something is a priority project, but that just means that they think that you should spend your time on it. They won't pay for people to work on it.

We occasionally get Stallman complaining that we're using the LGPL, not the GPL, and trying to force us to move to LGPLv3 (not going to happen

The sad part is that FSF is agonizingly inefficient in its advocacy campaigns, even when their complaints do have merit (like in this case - Nintendo's language is absurd and offensive). I don't know who writes their campaign material - Stallman himself? - but more often than not it comes across as whiny and childish, and at times it's so cult-like that it's downright creepy.

For example, "Windows 7 Sins" [windows7sins.org] - the creepiness starts right with the name. And then the very first paragraph - it's not about DRM, or

GNU Telephony is a project to enable anyone to use free as in freedom software for telephony, and with the freedom to do so on any platform they choose to use. We also wish to make it easy to use the Internet for real-time voice and video communication, and in fact for all forms of real-time collaboration. Finally we wish to make it possible to communicate securely and in complete privacy by applying distributed cryptographic solutions. Our goal is to enable secure and private real-time communication worldwide over the Internet that is free as in freedom, and is also free as in no cost too!

What problems do you people have? The FSF points out a TOS that strips your rights off, takes your pictures, movies, etc. and practically says "Even if you bought the 3DS for 250$ you don't own it and we take every content you have created with it as ours".

So, the FSF points that out and stars a campaign to fight for your basic rights, like free speech, ownership and copyright, and all you say is "Fuck you FSF, stop making negative campaigns and give me more free stuff".

Did they lose money to the flashcarts?I know several people with DS units, all of them have flashcarts and bought the DS specifically because of the convenience offered by a flashcart. In fact, of these people i doubt any of them would have bought a DS if it weren't for the ability to load a large number of games onto a single portable unit, without the hassle of carrying around a big stack of tiny cards that are easy to lose.Considering nintendo make a profit on every DS sold, they have actually benefitted

I eagerly await enlightenment as to how automatically assigning Nintendo a worldwide license to do whatever they want with pictures taken by a 3DS will battle piracy...

In virtually all relevant jurisdictions(ie. ones where people actually have money) copyright infringement is already illegal, often pretty harshly so, and in a nontrivial subset of those regions, cracking DRM schemes is as well, no clickwrap required. The "rights" that Nintendo is claiming in their EULA are either wildly irrelevant to piracy(except in the sense that grabbing copyrighted material produced by others on hardware they purchased from Nintendo is pretty damn piratical on Nintendo's part...) or not at all clearly legal(destroying somebody else's property because an "unauthorized peripheral" was connected to it) or an uneccessary duplication of existing, non-contractually-based law(copyright violation is illegal even if the clickwrap doesn't say so, DMCA-esque laws hold in a number of areas, again without the assistance of clickwrap).

This EULA is a mixture of invasive, redundant, and abusive, regardless of how much the evil pirates did or didn't cost them last round.

I'm sure that there are some less-than-not-evil companies that are using these clauses in order to sell stuff posted by the users, but the reason that it needs to be in the Terms of Service is that without it, you wouldn't be able to see anyone else's comments because Slashdot wouldn't have the legal right to transmit them to other users.